And yet more ETS polling

As reported in most detail at Pollytics blog, Nielsen asked a series of climate change questions in its survey over the weekend.

As in a June Nielsen poll and September Newspoll, about two-thirds of November Nielsen respondents supported the general idea of an ETS. However, when asked about the ‘specific Emissions Trading Scheme agreed between the Government and the Opposition Leadership’ a ‘don’t know enough’ option scored a massive 72%.

Only 51% of respondents think that the ETS will have a positive effect on the environment, suggesting that at least 15% support the ETS despite it having no positive effects on the environment (a not ridiculous position, if their logic is that while the Australian ETS will have negligible positive effects it will contribute to a global effort that may be effective). 45% think that the ETS will have a negative effect on the economy, while 22% think that it will have a positive effect.

On tactics, 44% of those favouring an ETS and 61% of those opposing it think Australia should wait until after the Copenhagen conference before settling on an ETS.

Unfortunately there are no new questions on the public’s willingness to pay for an ETS. The Minchinites in the Liberal Party are right about one thing, which is that the Opposition doing a deal with the government has meant that the costs of the scheme for many Australians have received very little attention. Australians without kids or with high incomes are, on the government’s figures, going to carry much of the ETS burden (other Australians will see a shift in relative prices, but will be compensated).

The ETS burden carriers are looking at $60+ a month in additional costs. On my rough calculations based on a 2008 Lowy Survey, only about 10% of the relevant income groups say they are prepared to pay that much. They are likely to be pretty unhappy when they realise what the government, with opposition approval, has planned for them.

4 Responses to “And yet more ETS polling

  • 1
    Sleetmute
    December 1st, 2009 08:20

    Based on the NSW IPART figures in the press yesterday, electricity price increases may be a lot higher than what Rudd and Wong have been projecting.

  • 2
    Mitch
    December 1st, 2009 15:33

    I think people take for granted the cost of living is going to go up and up as long as they vote for Labor.

    So, Andrew, do you have a personal opinion on Tony Abbott?

  • 3
    conrad
    December 1st, 2009 19:13

    “I think people take for granted the cost of living is going to go up and up as long as they vote for Labor”
    .
    I assume they take it for granted that the same is true of the Libs also — when has the cost of living ever gone down?

  • 4
    Steve
    December 9th, 2009 11:04

    Based on the recommended EU ETS Trading scheme that Kevin Rudd would have us join at Australia’s current emissions (580 million tonnes p.a.) and working population (10.6 million), a carbon price of $A225 would correspond to a cost per working person of more than $A12,000 per year, or around 25 per cent of the average after-tax earnings. Even if we halve our per-capita emissions by 2030, the cost would still be at least $6,000 each year per working person. All with no noticible decrease in greenhouse gases.